AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Hon’ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey
The applicants have preferred this First Bail Application under Section 483 of Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail, as they have been arrested in connection with Crime No. 90/2026, registered at Police Station : Ganj, District : Raipur ( C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 20(C) and 29 of NDPS Act.
Case of the prosecution, in brief is that on 03.04.2026 on the basis of information given by the informant, police authorities seized 22.540 kg of Ganja, which was kept in 14 packets from joint possession of applicants and a juvenile. Thereafter, they were arrested in connection with the afore-stated offence.
Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the applicants have no criminal antecedents, have been in judicial custody since 03.04.2026, and the trial is likely to take considerable time to conclude. In view of these circumstances, it is prayed that the applicants be enlarged on regular bail.
On the other hand, learned counsel appearing for the State/non-applicant opposes the bail application and submits that the contraband article, i.e., 22.540 kg of Ganja, was seized from the joint possession of the present applicants and a juvenile, which indicates their active involvement in the illegal transportation of the said contraband, therefore, the applicants are not entitled to the grant of regular bail.
I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary.
It appears that the contraband article, i.e., 22.540 kg of Ganja, was recovered from the possession of the present applicants and a juvenile, which is well above the commercial quantity. It is a well-settled principle of law that while considering bail, the court's role is confined to verifying the existence of a prima facie case and the recovery of contraband article from possession of present applicants indicates their prima facie involvement in the illegal transit of ganja, therefore, the rigour of Section 37 of the NDPS Act would squarely apply to the present case.
In view of the aforesaid discussion, I am not inclined to allow this application. Accordingly, the instant bail application is rejected.